How popular is this event? I signed up for it and was surprised by its format (winning teams get investments). Any links to experiences from past events? We should have a HN contingent :-p
I've never participated in past launch festival things but it's my understanding last year drew in about 1,000 developers for the hackathon which distilled into teams (though not sure how many). It's certainly an interesting event!
Also I feel like a vast majority of the people would have to be part of the HN contingent, lol.
Given one of the OPs annoyances is the continuing churn in tech tools, please don't waste time with Rust. The premise of the language (safety) is seductive but it comes at the cost of complexity. I am an experienced dev that spent a month evaluating it and then decided life was too short. Frankly, it is easier for someone with a C background to work in C++ than it is with Rust. That's because you can use the simple features of C++ to get going and add on complexity as you learn more/need it. With Rust, you get thrown into the deep end right at the start with the complex borrow/ownership system. There is no proper book yet on Rust (some good online sources where I commend the people on effort ... but there is no K&R).
P.S. I used Go for some projects last year and found the situation to be much better. The Go book that's available on the website reminded me of K&R ... readable in a weekend of two. This should be the criteria for new programming languages IMHO.
As a lifelong C developer who recently had a lot of success starting a new project in Rust, I disagree. Writing "C" in C++ until you need extra features always turns out terribly. In Rust, you have to write code the Rust way from day 1. It takes 20 minutes of fighting with the compiler every time I implement a new feature in Rust, but when it compiles it does what it's supposed to do, the code looks good and there are no memory issues.
Don't even get me started on Go. Most overhyped language ever, with some serious issues.
When I started software (90s), the tech industry didn't pay that well but did have a strong geek culture. I felt my managers didn't understand the work I did but they left me alone to do it. Timelines were in months and you largely self-managed yourself. Tools weren't great but didn't change very much. Integration testing was done by a separate QA function and programmers would slack off a little bit when it came to proper unit testing and documentation.
I miss that world (with perhaps one exception - that has to do with women in the field). Today, we have:
1) Insane deadline pressures
2) Managers asking for constant status updates
3) A general culture where people are on call outside of work hours or supposed to be reachable
4) While programmer salaries are high, they have essentially kept up with inflation. Under fields are generally worse off I admit.
5) No QA depts for the most part
6) Expectation that developers need to be more "professional" rather than produce great software.
7) Reduced employment mobility because developer interviews seem to have an insane standard. As a reference, for most jobs I got until 2005, I had a 30 minute to 1 hour interview with no coding questions.
8) 2-3 week shipping cycles (I posit scrum deadlines are like shipping deadline of old)
9) constant change in the tools of the trade. IT JUST NEVER ENDS.
So what happened? I think the end of the dot com era produced a few elite companies like Google. There was a cargo cult mentality that has turned most of software development into the same.
When people ask, I don't recommend a career in software any more. It definitely leads to unhealthy habits in average/above average people and, unless you have strong social ties, probably induces depression in many people. If you are an elite, Harvard-level, Google-level person, sure .. welcome to the gauntlet and have fun. For sane, average/above average people, I don't know what to say. There are few other paths that lead to financial stability these days. The software industry gives decent financial stability but extols a heavy cost in many.
We've been in constant crisis mode since 2000 (just as I graduated college). This crap kept me from buying a home, delayed marriage and children, etc. In my mid 30s, I have no job security, almost no retirement and no home. I had no idea life in the 21st century was going to be so miserable for young people in North America. I guess this is globalization in action :(
I've heard others say that, but I don't understand: Other than the 2008 recession, which was a much worse one than its predecessors, what is any worse than earlier periods?
If you are thinking of 9/11, before that we had the Cold War, against an enemy many orders of magnitude more dangerous and damaging.
I almost think that conservatives who sell crisis, to justify all sorts of things from civil liberties restrictions to wars, have unfortunately been believed.
I do think our government has functioned extremely poorly since 2000, as the GOP has put ideology before responsible governence. I know people will think I'm partisan, but how else can you characterize voting, multiple times, to not only shut down the whole government but actually trying to make it default on its debt?
Those of us who grew up in the '90s naturally compare to that. No Cold War, "the end of history", little in the way of foreign wars (and a remarkably successful one in Serbia where it felt like we were the good guys and were successful with it), an economy so successful that the Clinton administration was having to make plans for what would happen if the Treasury stopped issuing bonds, what felt like a hopeful technological future...
> but how else can you characterize voting, multiple times, to not only shut down the whole government but actually trying to make it default on its debt?
A last ditch effort to try to bring some sanity to a budgeting process so broken that the the national debt has doubled since Obama became President.
